FORGERY CHARGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 45, 22 February 1934, Page 11

FORGERY CHARGE.

ALTERED CHEQUE. YOUNG MAM FOR TRIAL. PLEA OF GTJIX.TY AMENDED. A charge of making a false document on January 5, by making a material alteration to a clicquc for £4 8/11, with intent that it should bo acted upon as genuine, thereby committing forgery, was brought against a young' man, Gordon Leslie James Mitchell, on summons, before Mr. W. R. MeKean, S.M., in the Police Court this morning. Detective-Sergeant McHugh prosecuted. Accused was not represented by counsel. A Chinese named Ah Wong, who bought a horse and harness from Mitchell and paid him by cash and a cheque for £4 8/11, and a bank official and an accountant for a city firm which had paid the cheque to the Chinese, gave evidence. Detective Hamilton said he interviewed accused at his home in Remuera on February 5 and told Mitchcll lie was making inquiries concerning a cheque for £40 8/11, which Mitchell had put through liis account at. the Bank of New Zealand. Accused said he had received the cheque from a Chinese as part of money for the sale of a horse and harness. Witness asked Mitchell how the cheque had become torn, and he said it had become wet in his pocket and was not torn intentionally. He showed accused a receipt for £7, and he said it was the one he had given to the Chinese for the sale of the horse and harness. "I said to him, 'Seeing that the horse and harness cost £7, you must have given the Chinaman over £30 in change,'" said witness. He then said: '"I might as well admit it. I altered the cheque, but you can't charge mo as I did not get any money." "First Stupid Action." Mitchell, after being warned, made a statement. He said he was a private contractor and that he had a banking account. Some time after receiving the cheque from the Chinese, he put it through his account at the bank, but altered it from £4 8/11 to £40 8/11, I by altering the word "four" to "fourtv" and adding a nought to the figure "4." The cheque, lie said, was returned to him through the bank, and he took it back to the Chinese and asked him to go to the drawers and get it replaced. The Chinese said he would do this. "I did not know how the cheque became torn," tho statement continued. '"I know in my sober senses that a cheque altered like this would not go through a bank, and I wish to say that when I altered it I was under the influence of liquor, and further, I could have cashed this cheque at various places, if I had desired to do so. I did not gain any money through the transaction. I did not attempt to draw or write out any cheques on that amount which I could have done. I have been dealing with the bank for the past five years, and this is the first stupid action I have done. I am sorry that this thing has happened, and it will not happen again." Mitchell at first pleaded guilty, but later pleading not guilty, he said he admitted altering the" cheque, but claimed that he was not responsible for his actions when he did it. He was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail, £100 in one surety, was allowed.